Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Michael Rosen explains the difference between a phonics test and a reading test ("Dear Justine Greening, whatever happened to ‘eradicating illiteracy’? Jan. 31). In a phonics test, children pronounce words presented to them in a list. In a reading test, children have to understand what they read.
Of great interest is the consistent finding that heavy phonics training only helps children do better on phonics tests. It has no impact on reading tests. Research also tells us that the best way to get better on reading tests is reading: The best predictor of reading achievement, in study after study, is the amount of recreational reading children have done.
The problem is not insufficient phonics teaching, as some claim. It is insufficient access to books. For many children of poverty, their only source of books is the library.
Research also tells us that better libraries are associated with better reading test scores. The implication is obvious: Invest in libraries and librarians, not in phonics tests.
Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern California

original article: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jan/31/justine-greening-literacy-schools-phonics-teaching

Sunday, January 29, 2017

Sent to the Australian, January 29Re: Literacy and numeracy tests for Australian year 1 students (January 29)

I hope that one the phonics screening tests will ask children to pronounce these words: hot, hoot, hook, hour, honest, house, hope, honey, and hoist. Each starts with "ho" but is pronounced differently. I don't think one person in a million knows the phonics rules that explain this, but all fluent English readers can pronounce these words correctly. The example comes from literacy scholar Frank Smith, who points out that many phonics rules are very complicated and have many exceptions. A few basic phonics rules can help make texts more comprehensible, but after that, the phonics path is hopeless.

Saturday, January 28, 2017

Re "Teachers forced to teach children phonics in major 'back to basics' move," January 28.

Australia has embraced heavy phonics teaching, because of "dismal" scores on international reading tests by Australian children. Research does not support this move.

Early and heavy ("systematic") phonics instruction only helps children do better on tests in which they pronounce words out-loud that are presented to them on a list. Heavy phonics instruction is not related to how well children do on tests in which they have to understand what they read. The best predictor of performance on tests of real reading is the amount of self-selected reading ("pleasure reading") that students do.

The first priority in improving reading is to make sure all children have access to interesting reading material. It should come as no surprise that study after study shows that access to a quality library is an excellent predictor of reading achievement.

Some good readers have had heavy phonics instruction, some have not. All have done a great deal of pleasure reading. It is reading that is crucial.

Thursday, January 26, 2017

Now that Mexico has announced that it will not pay for a border wall ("Mexican president scraps Trump summit over border wall dispute," January 26), I expect to see an announcement soon from Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., saying that Trump Towers (to be renamed Trump Patriot Towers) will build an uninterrupted line of buildings along the border, with financial support from the US Government: Trump condos, Trump hotels, and Trump office buildings, all with high security equipment. Entrance will be allowed only from the US side.

The Trump brothers will also announce that special "patriot" discounts will be available for those who reserve condos, hotel rooms and office space early.

Maybe this was the whole idea all along.

Stephen Krashen

Original article: https://www.ft.com/content/a69893a6-e379-11e6-8405-9e5580d6e5fb

Sunday, January 22, 2017

Research consistently confirms that low academic achievement is the result of poverty. In some urban areas the child poverty level is 80%. In high-scoring Finland, it is 5%. When researchers control for the effect of poverty, American students’ performance on international tests is near the top in the world. This shows that low achievement isn’t due to poor teaching, low standards or unions. The major cause is poverty.Making sure no child is left unfed, no child lacks proper health care and all children have access to quality libraries will improve academic achievement, as well as the quality of life for millions of children. This should be the first priority of the new secretary of education.Stephen KrashenLetter appeared at: http://www.wsj.com/articles/devos-promises-real-change-for-education-1485113504

Original version submitted to the Wall St Journal: http://skrashen.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-secretary-of-educations-first.html

NOTE: My letter stimulated comments on the Wall St Journal website. Robert Ray: Clarence Thomas and Ben Carson do not agree with you.Keven Burns: Emeritus Professor Krashen can also explain why Abraham Lincoln could not read or write. My response: If we look at cases of those who succeeded academically despite poverty, they all had access to books. I discussed these cases The Power of Reading (2004): Ben Carson became a reader, thanks to his mom's encouragement and the library. Once he started reading, he improved dramatically in school. Lincoln had little formal education, but was a dedicated reader, as were others with little schooling who succeeded in life,e.g. Thomas Edison, who dropped out of elementary school! As a boy, Edison sold newspapers on a train, and spent his time in a local library during layovers. These cases support my point. We need to make sure all students have access to reading material. For many young people living in poverty today, their only access to books is the school library. The research on school libraries is strong: Better school libraries mean higher reading scores, and the presence of a credentialed school librarian is also related to better reading achievement. (Note: There is a word limit on comments.)

Saturday, January 21, 2017

In his inaugural address, Mr. Trump said that our educational system "leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge.'” President Trump is apparently unaware of the fact that when researchers statistically control for the effects of poverty, American students score near the top of the world.

Poverty means, among other things, food deprivation, poor medical care, and lack of access to reading material. All of these have profound negative effects on school performance. The best teaching in the world will have little value if students are hungry, ill, and have little or nothing to read. Our child poverty rate is 21%, the highest of all industrialized countries. In contrast, child poverty in high-scoring Finland is about 5%.

Martin Luther King was right: "We are likely to find that the problems of housing and education, instead of preceding the elimination of poverty, will themselves be affected if poverty is first abolished.” (1967, Final Words of Advice)President Trump's staff needs to focus on the real problem in American education.

Friday, January 20, 2017

Sent to the Washington Post, Jan. 20The Post reports that "billions spent to fix failing schools" didn't work (January 19). But none of the "solutions" (replace staff, become a charter, new teaching strategies, a longer school day, new teacher evaluations) addressed the real problem: Failing schools are largely high poverty schools. Poverty is the problem. Poverty means food deprivation, insufficient medical care, and little access to reading material; research confirms that each of these has a strong negative impact on school performance. The best teaching in the world will not help if children are hungry, ill, and have nothing to read. Let's do the obvious and do it immediately: Protect children from the impact of poverty by improving food programs, improving in-school health care, and investing more in libraries and librarians. Research confirms that making sure no child is left unfed, no child lacks proper health care, and all children have access to quality libraries will improve academic achievement, and for less cost than expensive interventions that don't work. It will also improve the quality of life for millions of children. This should be the first priority for the US Department of Education.

Stephen KrashenProfessor EmeritusUniversity of Southern California

Original article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/obama-administration-spent-billions-to-fix-failing-schools-and-it-didnt-work/2017/01/19/6d24ac1a-de6d-11e6-ad42-f3375f271c9c_story.html?utm_campaign=buffer&utm_content=buffer48643&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=.5a31e9d1d8ee#comments

Monday, January 16, 2017

My activist philosophy is based on
Bertrand Russell's statement: "Facts which ought to guide the decisions of
statesmen (sic)... do not acquire their importance if they remain buried in
scientific journals." (Betrand Russell, The Social Responsibilities of
Scientists, 1962)

I regard my "activist" responsibility
to be the sharing of results of research on language and literacy development
that are often "buried in scientific journals," findings that appear
to be unknown to the public but that could make life much easier as well as
more interesting for millions if they were more widely known.

I do this largely in the form of
letters to the editor to newspapers throughout the world, and I post my letters
(published and unpublished) on facebook, on skrashen.blogspot.com and link to
them on twitter. I have not kept track of my published letters, but I estimate
that over 1000 have been published. (I am still far behind the world record
holder, Subhash Chandra Agrawal from New Delhi, who has probably
published over 4000 by now.)

I
don't know if my letters have done much good, but I feel compelled to continue.
As stated in Jewish philosophy, “You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are youfree to desist from it"(Ethics of the Fathers (2, 21).

Research consistently confirms that low academic achievement is the
result of poverty. In some urban areas, the child poverty level is 80% (the
national average is an unacceptable 21%; in high-scoring Finland it is 5%).

When researchers control for the effect of poverty, American students' performance
on international tests is near the top of the world. This shows that low
achievement is not due to poor teaching, low standards, or unions. The
major cause is poverty.

Poverty
means food deprivation, insufficient medical care, and little access to reading
material; each of these has a strong negative impact on school performance. The
best teaching in the world will not help if children are hungry, ill, and have
nothing to read.

Let's do the obvious and do it
immediately: improve food programs, improve in-school health care, and invest
more in libraries and librarians. This will work. For example, in a study involving
40 countries, my colleagues and I reported that the presence of an adequate
school library significantly reduces the negative effect of poverty on reading
achievement.

Making sure no child is left
unfed, no child lacks proper health care, and all children have access to
quality libraries will improve academic achievement, as well as the quality of
life for millions of children. This should be the first priority of the new
Secretary of Education.

Stephen Krashen

original article: http://www.wsj.com/articles/whos-afraid-of-betsy-devos-1484352708?mod=djemMER#livefyre-toggle-SB11290374184297783384704582553324188822302

Sources:

Study involvoing 40 countires: Krashen, S., Lee, S.Y. and McQuillan, J. 2012. Is the
library important? Multivariate studies at the national and international
level. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 8(1): 26-36.(available at www.sdkrashen.com, under "free voluntary
reading")

Control for the effect of poverty: Carnoy, M
and Rothstein, R. 2013, What Do
International Tests Really Show Us about U.S. Student Performance.
Washington DC: Economic Policy Institute. 2012. http://www.epi.org/). Payne, K. and Biddle, B. 1999. Poor
school funding, child poverty, and mathematics achievement. Educational
Researcher 28 (6): 4-13; Bracey, G. 2009. The Bracey Report on the Condition of
Public Education. Boulder and Tempe: Education and the Public Interest Center
& Education Policy Research Unit. http://epicpolicy.org/publication/Bracey-Report;

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

The most important sentence in "Philadelphia school district librarians: A species nearly extinct?" (January 9) is: "The research is clear: Students who attend schools with libraries and credentialed librarians perform better on standardized tests than those who lack them. Lower-income students benefit the most."

The reason: Studies show that the most consistent and important predictor of reading achievement is the amount of self-selected reading students do. The school library is an important source of reading material for all students and is often the only source for students living in poverty. The school librarian is often the major source of information and advice about selecting reading material and is responsible for making sure quality reading material of interest to students is available, whether print or electronic.

Given the centrality of reading ability, the Philadelphia School District's lack of support for libraries and credentialed librarians makes school success impossible for many students.

Monday, January 9, 2017

Samuel Abrams' fifth "business lesson" for schools ("The wrong and right business lessons for schools," January 8) is to stop testing every student but use only "high quality exams administered to small groups of students," as in done in Finland. Research by distinguished scholar David Berliner and his colleagues supports this recommendation: more testing does not result in higher test scores.

We can do this now using the NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress), a highly respected standardized test given to small groups of students who each take a portion of the test every few years. Results are extrapolated to estimate how larger groups (states, large districts) would score, and the NAEP is used to compare our achievement to that of other countries.

Let's find out if the NAEP tells us what we need to know about student performance, and whether the time-consuming and expensive tests we currently give students add any useful information.